Vetter v. Germany



AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application No. 14394/88

by Alfred VETTER

against the Federal Republic of Germany

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private

on 3 September 1990, the following members being present:

MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President

S. TRECHSEL

G. SPERDUTI

E. BUSUTTIL

G. JÖRUNDSSON

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

J.-C. SOYER

H.G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

Mrs. G. H. THUNE

Sir Basil HALL

MM. F. MARTINEZ RUIZ

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

A.V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO

Mr. H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the

Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 7 August 1988

by Alfred Vetter against the Federal Republic of Germany and registered

on 24 November 1988 under file No. 14394/88;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 40 of the

Rules of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

The applicant is a German citizen, born in 1949 and at present

detained in prison in Diez/Lahn.

He complains that on 23 March 1987 he was wrongly convicted by

the Frankenthal Regional Court (Landgericht) of theft and driving

without a licence and sentenced to thirty-two months' imprisonment. In

consequence of this judgment the applicant's conditional release on

26 May 1986 from preventive detention (Sicherungsverwahrung) was

revoked on 13 November 1987.

The applicant's appeal on points of law (Revision) against the

judgment of 23 March 1987 was rejected by the Federal Court (Bundes-

gerichtshof) on 3 August 1987 as being ill-founded.

The appeal (Beschwerde) against the revocation of the

conditional release was rejected by the Regional Court on

13 November 1987 and a further appeal by the Koblenz Court of Appeal

(Oberlandesgericht) on 18 December 1987.

A constitutional complaint (Verfassungsbeschwerde) against the

latter decision was rejected by a group of three judges of the Federal

Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) on 4 February 1988 as

being clearly ill-founded.

The applicant submits that he was wrongly convicted because

witnesses for the defence were not heard and he was not allowed to put

questions to the witnesses for the prosecution in violation of

Article 6 (Art. 6) of the Convention. He further submits that his

preventive detention was wrongly ordered and that the conditions of

his detention amount to a violation of Articles 3 (Art. 3) and

5 (Art. 5) of the Convention.

The Commission has examined the applicant's separate

complaints as they have been submitted by him and finds that the

applicant has in no way substantiated his allegations. Even assuming

that domestic remedies were exhausted in all respects, the Commission

consequently concludes that the application does not disclose any

appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the

Convention.

It follows that the application is as a whole manifestly

ill-founded within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the

Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission

DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.

Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission

(H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)